“What about a VWD carrier?” I asked. “What about it?” said he. “If you breed a carrier to a clear you might get a carrier. Might not. If you get a pup that bleeds when you do toe nails or crop the ears or tails, then you don’t breed either parent again.” “Oh.” He shrugged “Since you don’t go out for stud service, the odds of you ‘getting it’ are about zilch. But I’ll test if you want…..” Made sense to me so I skipped the test. No dog of my breeding ever had or produced Von Willibrands disease.

With all the to-do about CHD, VWD, etc. why do breeders not see wobbly hindquarters, popping hocks, sagging toplines, pounding fronts, and faulty temperaments unless they are in someone else's kennel?

Toy Fox Terrier breeders became very excited about DNA testing for congenital hypothyroidism with goiter. Curious about how the CHG test came to be developed for a rare condition in a rare breed, I contacted breeders and Dr. Fyfe for statistical data. The response was terrific but frankly, little was learned except that there’s a vehement condemnation against those who are "too cheap" to spend an average of $100 bucks per dog to test for what we are told is in fact, a rare condition.

My survey revealed people who knew of a CHG affected litter but only two people reported having experienced CHG. Two others admitted that upon genetic testing they discovered they had a carrier. Since we are unable to learn how many dogs have been tested to date, we still don't know how or why the test was even developed.

This we do know. CHG affected dogs can’t spread the gene because they DIE within 2 to 3 weeks unless there is immediate veterinary intervention. Even then, the puppy absolutely will strangle as the goiter grows. Nature immediately weeds out that unhealthy gene package just as it does most other serious congenital defects unless breeders intercede to "save the puppy!"

The catch is, a dog may appear okay but can be a carrier of a genetic defect. In the 60's and 70's, breeders were convinced that CHD (canine hip dysplasia), was a simple recessive defect. Everyone rushed to vets for OFA (Orthopedic Foundation for Animals) X-rays. Vets rejoiced at the extra income and everyone was happy. Except for a couple of little details.

1.) OFA xrays failed to reduce the percentage of hip dysplasia in most breeds. 2.) Readings were contradictory, i.e. a dysplastic x-ray could look good when done by another vet or when challenged and re-submitted. This writer repeatedly challenged Dr. Corley in my Canine Chronicle magazine column on why OFA only certified two joints out of at least ten major joints which determine soundness? Other columnists, breeders, and vets picked up on the subject. Finally, after years of badgering, OFA began to certify elbows.

But there was still a major flaw in the genetic system, one that affected thousands of breeders who strived to make intelligent, informed breeding decisions based on reliable data. I continued to challenge Corley on why OFA refused to insist on positive I.D. such as tattoo, and later, microchip. OFA still does not require positive I.D.

By then the big shocker had become evident. Astute breeders had figured out for themselves and in response to my columns, they wrote, they called, they said they felt duped! Xray, like CERF and most such tests, is diagnostic, not predictive. It's like being tested for diabetes or heart disease. An OFA number only means only that the dog x-rayed normal, not that he won't develop hip dysplasia and certainly not that he won't produce it. So an OFA number is only good for current bragging rights but how many dogs have you re-certified? If top winning dogs can fail to pass OFA while dogs with obviously bad rear movement sport OFA numbers, what does it all mean? Genetic tests are supposed to clear up any confusion and worry, right? Breeders might want to re-think the risk of anesthesia just to get a piece of paper that may only be good for a few months.

Exactly the same is true of eye exams. The standard of certification is called CERF, Canine Eye Registry Foundation. It is a risk-free test, often available at dog shows BUT - it too is only diagnostic. CERF certification does not mean that the dog won't develop a serious problem such as lens luxation which is what happened to my English import Mini-Bull terrier only two weeks after she was CERF certified! The real tragedy in that is that I learned it was not that unusual for a CERF-certified dog to literally "go blind."

The same can be said of color doppler heart exams. I know from personal experience, and heartbreak.

You can stop reading right here if you don't like where this is going. Such tests are important, useful tools. Every breeder should carry a good tool chest but it isn't the saw and hammer that builds a house, it is the carpenter!

We need to understand some basics before we rush out to buy the tool chest. Veterinarians don't learn much about canine genetics in vet school. That is a specialty course, an advanced degree. The sad truth is, some vets are cashing in on tests they know little about. Dr. Bardens is but one example from the 70s. He made a lot of money with his fulcrum X-ray technique, teaching (for a price) other vets how to cash in on the procedure. There is no way to know how many dogs were actually damaged by the force used but hundreds of complaints put him out of "business."

Breeding good dogs in not rocket science when we remove the blinders and put on our thinking cap. Regardless of the health defect, you would never breed from or to an affected dog. An affected dog would not be winning in the show ring. Putting a dog on public display to be examined by a judge might, in itself, be a pretty good exclusionary test for eye defects including cataracts, primary lens luxation, orthopedic problems including hip and elbow dysplasia, spine, and neck abnormalities, and in fact, the level of exertion required for some dogs to get around the show ring expose heart or airway problems!

Perhaps there's a better and predictive way to be sure you are breeding to and from healthy dogs. With the advances in DNA testing, you may be able to ascertain whether a non-affected dog is a carrier for a growing list of health defects. A DNA swab is non-invasive, unlike x-ray and anesthesia. It will take some time to see how reliable DNA tests are for VWD, CERF, CHG, etc.

In the meantime, be comforted in the knowledge that your DNA-cleared dog can only produce affected pups if bred to an affected dog. No way will you knowingly do that! If the DNA cleared dog produces a carrier, that means the other dog is a carrier. Can two clear dogs produce a carrier? No clear answer yet. Can a clear dog develop the problem or become affected? We're told that in primary lens luxation (PLL) that can happen so there remain unanswered questions with new DNA testing.

If If you plan to advertise a dog at stud, in today's market you better have him genetically cleared for every potential defect known to that breed! Even so, your competitors will still whisper and insinuate things about your stud's genes. If your dog turns out to be a carrier, you only breed to cleared dogs. No big deal. It is not a death sentence, not even the end of a breeding career. Your Doberman might carry blue or fawn but if you don't want that in your line, you don't breed to a dog that carries it. Personally I see no reason anyone would ever breed from an affected dog even though it has been done on the grounds that he has so many rare virtues desperately needed by that breed, and he was only bred to "clear" dogs. A quagmire at best.

Novice breeders are quick to throw stones at proven (tested) breeders who are slow to jump on every bandwagon. Such breeders know their bloodline, including what dark genes lurk there. They also know that “kennel blindness” occurs on both sides of the lenses. Successful breeders may be stoned for not testing; by losers who have finally found a platform from which to proclaim “I’m more conscientious than you.”

Over twenty years ago I wrote "You can live with and love an unsound or sickly dog but a dog with bad temperament is a joy to no one." It became a popular quote for a very good reason. It is true. So how are you going to prove the temperament and character that is correct for your breed? Isn't that far more important than proving your dog has good hips, eyes, or heart? I say it is but the only temperament test is a dog that is shown (without drugs!) in competitive events and one who is known to consistently produce mentally sound dogs.

Puppy buyers have been schooled to ask for health certifications but they don't realize that the sire or dam has to be locked away when visitors come, or that it can't breathe or reproduce naturally! AKC has made advances by offering Canine Good Citizen tests. Obedience and Agility tests a dog's I.Q. and stability.

There is one reality we must face before we get all wound up about the latest, newest, desperately needed DNA test or health screening. In spite of all that we do, genetic problems are increasing. Every year new diseases are diagnosed in companion animals. It isn't that researchers and vets are getting better at what they do. It is a sign of the times and equally true in the human population. Just thought I'd mention it...

So even with all the tests, are breeders able to fix canine eye, heart, organic, reproductive, and orthopedic defects? We haven't made much progress in some breeds, with problems we can SEE, the ones that are DOMINANT and can shorten the life span or cripple the dog. A casual look around any show ring clearly reveals some breeders would rather paint their gene bank with paper certificates than with good structure, health, and temperament.

Maybe the answer lies in human nature. If we can buy bragging rights for a hundred bucks, that is enough for some breeders. My repeatedly (and ignored) suggestion is that all breeding dogs should earn a champion, field, obedience, or agility title before they are bred regardless of how clean the genes are!

Genetic testing is a useful tool. Think of it as one of many brushes in the artist’s case. Do we teach breeders to step back and view the landscape before splashing color on the canvas? Or do we encourage them to paint with just one color, knowing that our canvas will easily win over theirs?

I don’t have a lot of letters after my name. I just have a lot of top ranked winners and producers. I’ve been creating juried (judged) works of art and like many others who learned the hard way, I did it before we had such wonderful tests and tools. We learned “genetics” before words like polygenic, homozygous, and DNA were invented! We will gratefully use what science has afforded us but the test has yet to be invented that will replace logic, attention to detail, pedigree research and hard work!

If we have truly learned anything about genetics while painting our gene bank, it is how to create a masterpiece that can be reliably reproduced. That is the challenge.

Portions excerpted from ShowSight Magazine columns, circa 2006

http://www.thedogplace.org/Genetics/Painting-Genes-06021005_Andrews.asp